#21 - The proper way to plan a scientific project is first

[Hyunuk Park]

If E is right, C might as well be right. Because we are not told to select the most flawed answer, both might as well be answers.
E describes that the article is considering the issue as "shortcoming" and "fatal". So if E is right, doesn't the language used in E indicate that he is blaming (=faulting) them and thus make C also right?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Hyunuk,

You asked "So if E is right, doesn't the language used in E indicate that he is blaming (=faulting) them and thus make C also right?"

The short answer is no, not at all. It's important to be careful not to make unwarranted assumptions.

Answer C describes faulting the (original) planners for not foreseeing a certain event (the end of the Cold War). Nowhere in the argument are the original planners faulted for not foreseeing the end of the Cold War, nor is this even implied. We also do not know whether the end of the Cold War would or would not be considered foreseeable based on the argument.

Instead, the argument uses the fact that the original purpose is no longer applicable (the shortcoming) to conclude that the space station should not be built.

The problem/flaw, however, is that even if the original purpose is no longer applicable, there could still be valid reasons for building the space station, which is why the shortcoming is not necessarily fatal.

This flaw is a type of evidence error in which some negative evidence against a claim/position is used as if it completely disproves that position/claim.